He may have just used the term because we westerners have some degree of familiarity with it.

In the list of the 32 major marks of an enlightened being mention is made of a "white ūrṇā curl that emits light between eyebrows". The urna is "generally thought to be a whorl of hair and be a mark or sign of the Buddha as a mahāpuruṣa or great being."

gregkavarnos wrote:He may have just used the term because that's what we westerners have some degree of familiarity with it.

In the list of the 32 major marks of an enlightened being mention is made of a "white ūrṇā curl that emits light between eyebrows". The urna is "generally thought to be a whorl of hair and be a mark or sign of the Buddha as a mahāpuruṣa or great being."

CrawfordHollow wrote:I guess I still feel that the "opening of the third eye" is not a Buddhist concept (for lack of a better word), symbolic or otherwise. The practices of tsa lung work with the channels and winds, but are there any practices that one can point to that specifically work to open this third eye? Otherwise I would say that we are mixing up ideas and traditions here. But perhaps the conversation has moved beyond this point.

Well, the conversation has veered in many directions, but it strikes me that, unless someone can provide a textual source from the original Tibetan (or Sanksrit) making reference to a "Third Eye" relating to anything more than a detail of generation stage visualization, it's just a superimposition.

So far, all I've seen is commentary on how the three eyes see the three times. Whether or not the Avadhuti exits the forehead, or the crown, and whether or not the three nadis meet in the space between the eyebrows, or not, does nothing to support any reference to a Third Eye in the original Tantric sources, or in the Tibetan commentaries. So far, all I can see is a superimposition, which is not necessary, and may be detrimental or misleading.

The closest term in Sanskrit tantric texts seems to be tricakṣus or trinayana (mig gsum pa, 三目) "triple-eyed" or "three-eyed", apparently always referring to iconography or generation stage visualization. The Tibetan term appears about three times in the Mahavairocana-tantra for example.

gregkavarnos wrote:He may have just used the term because that's what we westerners have some degree of familiarity with it.

Yes. It is also a dream yoga practice from a dzogchen teacher which therefore could include any terms at all from any kind of tradition for purposes of expedient means. @cone: I just thought it was interesting he used the word 'prana'.

As long as the OP knows he isn't doing thabs lam and therefore this is not a mark of accomplishment IMHO there's no harm in acknowledging the existence of the energy body and its many variants in different systems. I mean look this is the Vajrayana subforum right - Vajrayana is the energy body. We're hardly spilling the beans by saying, yes, there is such a thing as Vajrayana. I don't think the message should be "it doesn't exist" either, because even shine gets weird sometimes. Strange things happen, the rlung gets restless in its sleep and may sometimes flicker awake for a moment. I would even be surprised if such things haven't happened to most of us.

TB is such a rich Byzantine path I think sometimes we forget that it's all supposed to be one yana: "wait, wait you're doing shine, don't look into the next room of the mandala, there is no next room!"

No harm.

I fled Him, down the nights and down the days; I fled Him, down the arches of the years; I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways, Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears, I hid from Him, and under running laughter. Up vistaed hopes I sped; And shot, precipitated, Adown Titanic glooms of chasmèd fears, From those strong Feet that followed, followed after. But with unhurrying chase, And unperturbèd pace, Deliberate speed, majestic instancy, They beat - and a Voice beat - More instant than the Feet - ‘All things betray thee, who betrayest Me.’

I fled Him, down the nights and down the days; I fled Him, down the arches of the years; I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways, Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears, I hid from Him, and under running laughter. Up vistaed hopes I sped; And shot, precipitated, Adown Titanic glooms of chasmèd fears, From those strong Feet that followed, followed after. But with unhurrying chase, And unperturbèd pace, Deliberate speed, majestic instancy, They beat - and a Voice beat - More instant than the Feet - ‘All things betray thee, who betrayest Me.’

gregkavarnos wrote:He may have just used the term because that's what we westerners have some degree of familiarity with it.

In the list of the 32 major marks of an enlightened being mention is made of a "white ūrṇā curl that emits light between eyebrows". The urna is "generally thought to be a whorl of hair and be a mark or sign of the Buddha as a mahāpuruṣa or great being."

What else are you supposed to call a faculty that allows one to see beyond the two physical eyes?

Maybe I should have used term, "mind's eye"?

/Dylan

Some people call this faculty 'imagination', some others in this thread are saying that you are becoming aware of a subtle body. My guess is that you will believe that you have had a special experience and reify it accordingly. There is not much I can do to help you. I'm sorry about that. In the future read through my posts again.

The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

gregkavarnos wrote:He may have just used the term because that's what we westerners have some degree of familiarity with it.

In the list of the 32 major marks of an enlightened being mention is made of a "white ūrṇā curl that emits light between eyebrows". The urna is "generally thought to be a whorl of hair and be a mark or sign of the Buddha as a mahāpuruṣa or great being."

What else are you supposed to call a faculty that allows one to see beyond the two physical eyes?

Maybe I should have used term, "mind's eye"?

Some people call this faculty 'imagination', some others in this thread are saying that you are becoming aware of a subtle body. My guess is that you will believe that you have had a special experience and reify it accordingly. There is not much I can do to help you. I'm sorry about that. In the future read through my posts again.

It's not just one experience, it is ongoing - 24/7.And if you couldn't help me to begin with or didn't believe in my experience then why did you bother posting in this thread?

So I guess no one can relate to what I am seeing?

Last edited by DGA on Tue Jan 21, 2014 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:removed user's name

Let's put it this way Dylan: what you are "seeing" with your "third eye" has just about as much reality and meaning as what you see with your eyeballs. That is, it has as much meaning and reality as you give it. Nothing more.

I fled Him, down the nights and down the days; I fled Him, down the arches of the years; I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways, Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears, I hid from Him, and under running laughter. Up vistaed hopes I sped; And shot, precipitated, Adown Titanic glooms of chasmèd fears, From those strong Feet that followed, followed after. But with unhurrying chase, And unperturbèd pace, Deliberate speed, majestic instancy, They beat - and a Voice beat - More instant than the Feet - ‘All things betray thee, who betrayest Me.’

There are people who are naturally prone to psychic experiences. Maybe Motova is one of them (although it is impossible to say for sure.) As most of us generally aren't such people, we are probably not able to advise him on it, other than to say that the Buddhist tradition has a place for them (which modern materialistic society generally does not.) But I don't think that the notion of 'the third eye' necessarily refers to a psychic power, as such. There are also ways of interpreting it in terms of insight and compassion, of a kind of 'seeing of the causes of suffering', rather than a clairvoyant power.

My only advice is that as far as Buddhism is concerned, the main aim is always 'practice Dharma for its own sake', not in order to attain psychic abilities or any other reason. I am sure that everyone here will agree that this is the nature of correct aspiration.

Sometimes spirituality is a liberation, and sometimes it's an alibi ~ David Brazier

CrawfordHollow wrote:That is a fair assessment, Tobes. All too often you see practitioners becoming elitist- like having empowerment is akin to belonging to some high-class counrty club for the rich and famous.

Yes, to be completely honest, I find this to be a very acute problem.

I actually have a long history with various Tibetan lineages, but I basically never post on this part of the forum. The standard assumption always seems to be, not only that you are an ignorant schmo, but that you are a dangerous ignorant schmo. Alongside a sort of deep sadness, of the kind "how sorry I am that you do not get to taste our liberation."

There is always a way to get around this, but you must submit your CV: "Here are my connections with lamas X, Y and Z. Here are the teachings I have received. See, I also am one of your kind."

I think something is going pretty badly wrong when the method takes on such extraordinary meaning, and becomes the means to evaluate others as inferior.

jeeprs wrote:There are people who are naturally prone to psychic experiences. Maybe Motova is one of them (although it is impossible to say for sure.) As most of us generally aren't such people, we are probably not able to advise him on it, other than to say that the Buddhist tradition has a place for them (which modern materialistic society generally does not.) But I don't think that the notion of 'the third eye' necessarily refers to a psychic power, as such. There are also ways of interpreting it in terms of insight and compassion, of a kind of 'seeing of the causes of suffering', rather than a clairvoyant power.

My only advice is that as far as Buddhism is concerned, the main aim is always 'practice Dharma for its own sake', not in order to attain psychic abilities or any other reason. I am sure that everyone here will agree that this is the nature of correct aspiration.

Motova wrote:After a few sessions of mindfulness meditation and concentrating on an eye between my two physical eyes, I started seeing orbs (of various colours and sizes), masses (coloured clouds or smoke), auras, and visual snow. Moreover, I noticed the frequency of psychic happenings increased dramatically and my ability to see what I visualize had increased.

My questions are:

Have any of you experienced or read anything close to what I am describing?

These types of experiences of orbs and other phenomena are not all that uncommon among meditators, and are a byproduct of the development of meditative composure (samādhi). The fact that you were specifically focusing on a "third eye" may or may not have contributed to the arising of these experiences.

Motova wrote:What is Vajrayana's perspective on the third eye?

See the entry on Five Eyes from Rigpa Wiki. This classification of five eyes is sūtrayāna, but in a nutshell, through developing perceptions of light (ālokasaṃjñā) one can eventually attain vision of the divine eye (divyacakṣu), whereby one can see beings from other realms, and so on. This is an advanced ability but is still considered mundane.

Motova wrote:Does an opened third eye mean some kind of spiritual attainment? Or can someone on any level of spiritual development open it?

Some people are more prone to experiencing these kinds of extra-sensory phenomena than others. In the exoteric Buddhist teachings, light nimittas can be used to further develop samādhi or the divine eye, etc. They are neither good nor bad, and are not a sign of high attainments. For any practices that are not exoteric, such as vajrayāna practices, one is best advised to find a qualified teacher and follow their advice.

Thanks for sharing your experiences in more detail. It will be interesting to see what advice others give you. You think I am being cynical and perhaps unkind but you should practice to see that the colors and forms you experience have no essence. They are not really there. They are empty of themselves. They are experienced but are not really there. When you understand that they appear but are empty of anything, then they disappear.So study about buddhism. Be cynical yourself. After you have understood that these experiences aren't real then you will be a buddhist. If you don't want to do this then that is fine. But in the end, after the cynicism, comes a greater appreciation of the ordinary. And that's great and that is what I have eluded to in my posts. And that's where buddhists are headed. That's the real magic.Other people here who are saying 'go ahead' aren't really sure what you should do. Ask them for real practical advice and they won't be able to give it. They will say 'find a teacher' because they don't have enough confidence in their own ability to help you. But I will guarantee that these experiences will end when you understand that they are not really there. You need to study buddhism. Understand the notion of no-self. Meditatate more. Then all the experiences will go and stop disturbing you if that's what you want. Best wishes and best of luck, Andrew.

The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

Okay. These snide "country club" references are of no help to anybody (especially Motova) and I think you will find that nobody (as far as I have read) is trying to "pull rank" on Motova about their experiences. I think you will find that the majority of people have been saying that experiences are just that: experiences and that Motova should really be looking at find a qualified teacher to explain these experiences to them (and give them practices).

And Tobes, I am sorry, but you know very well that in Buddhism in general, and Tibetan Buddhism specifically, meditational experiences are not subjects for public discussion. Mainly because it may act as a cause for an unexperienced practitioner to further reify their experiences. Jnana and Simon E. have both referred to "nimitta", Motova would do well to research this term.

If Motova wishes to discuss his experiences with people via Private Message, it is completely up to them, accounts of and discussion concerning his specific experiences in this thread are now officially over.

I anybody wishes to post some more in- depth information or links to nimitta now would be a good time to do it.